RE: Boilerplate

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

I for one prefer to make the new boiler plate section title
the same as the one we will be using in the upcoming set of
SNMPv3 RFCs. I suspect many people in the future will/may look
at those examples and use them. Hope everyone can agree.
Which then means that the boilerplate becomes:


------------ new boiler plate for MIB documents -----------

1. The Internet-Standard Management Framework

   For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current
   Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer to section 7 of
   RFC xxxx [RFCxxxx].

   Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed
   the Management Information Base or MIB.  MIB objects are generally
   accessed through the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP).

   Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms defined in the
   Structure of Management Information (SMI).  This memo specifies a MIB
   module that is compliant to the SMIv2, which is described in STD 58,
   RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC 2580
   [RFC2580].

2. Normative References

   [RFC2578]  McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J.,
              Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of Management
              Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April
              1999.

   [RFC2579]  McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J.,
              Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Textual Conventions for
              SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999.

   [RFC2580]  McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J.,
              Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Conformance Statements for
              SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, April 1999.

3. Informative References

   [RFCxxxx]  Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart,
              "Introduction and Applicability Statements for the
              Internet-Standard Management Framework", RFC xxxx,
              December 2002.

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harrington, David [mailto:dbh@enterasys.com]
> Sent: vrijdag 13 december 2002 1:51
> To: MIBS (E-mail)
> Subject: Boilerplate
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> As SNMPv3 co-chair, in agreement with my co-chair, we believe 
> it was important that the documents under SNMPv3 WG control 
> were published to reflect WG consensus. That is being done.
> 
> I should point out that the SNMPv3 documents contain two 
> documents with mibs, and they contain a boilerplate that 
> reads almost identically to the current proposed version of 
> the boilerplate. The only difference I am aware of is in the 
> boilerplate title:
> 
> The mibs@ops.ietf.org proposed boilerplate says "1.  The SNMP 
> Management Framework", while the boilerplate used in the 
> SNMPv3 documents says "1.  The Internet-Standard Management 
> Framework".
> 
> Call me sloppy, but as a contributor, I simply don't care 
> about that level of inconsistency between the boilerplate and 
> the SNMPv3 documents. It makes not one whit of difference to 
> me, since boilerplates change over time anyway, so even if we 
> sync them up today, they will almost certainly diverge in the future.
> 
> Neither I nor my co-chair nor the SNMPv3 WG have 
> responsibility for the boilerplate, so I can honestly say 
> this is simply not my problem.
> 
> If the members of the mibs community want to see the 
> boilerplate be consistent with the SNMPv3 documents, then the 
> boilerplate should probably be changed to match. Your choice.
> 
> dbh
> 
> David Harrington
> Network Management Architect
> Office of the CTO
> Enterasys Networks
>  
>